Vladimir Putin’s war on terror could have consequences as devastating as Bush’s. Instead of weakening terrorist targets — Al Qaeda for Bush, ISIL for Putin — these “global” wars only entrench jihadism in the Middle East. This can only lead to ISIL’s expansion in the region, in Europe, and then worldwide. Putin’s war could precipitate a string of terror attacks of unprecedented magnitude, especially if the fall of the rebel-held part of Aleppo kills the prospect of a political solution to the Syrian civil war, leaving Assad and ISIL as the only combatants.

Both presidents heralded their vision of a global war on terror in speeches delivered at the General Assembly of the United Nations. Although they addressed the international community, both speeches were sharply divisive, pitching “us” versus “them.” Both leaders evoked the legacy of the “United Nations” against the Hitler-led Axis in World War II and described “terror” as our most ubiquitous threat. For Bush, “terror” was a threat to democracy; for Putin, it’s a threat to “state sovereignty.” In both cases, their solution answer was a call for an aggressive, worldwide campaign to defeat terrorism.

Both Putin and Assad were trained in intelligence communities of authoritarian regimes that deny the reality of popular uprisings.

Putin agrees with Bush’s 2003 assessment that Middle Eastern nations are too weak to achieve proper emancipation. But he slammed his decision to send troops into Iraq, first to topple Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical regime, then to occupy the country under the pretense of “democracy building.”

“Far from learning from others’ mistakes, everyone just keeps repeating them, and so the export of revolutions, this time of so-called democratic ones, continues,” Putin told the U.N. General Assembly in September. There is no “Arab spring” in Putin’s lexicon, only an “export of revolutions,” spurred on by an outside power and designed to undermine “state sovereignty.”

In this regard, Putin shares Bashar al-Assad’s vision of the world. Both Putin and Assad were trained in intelligence communities of authoritarian regimes that deny the reality of popular uprisings, and believe in “international conspiracies” that must be fought mercilessly, even at the expense of their own people.

What “state sovereignty” really means in this context is that the ruling regime holds all the power — the people none. This dictatorial credo is especially destructive in combination with the U.N. norm of upholding state sovereignty. It means the Assad regime is internationally recognized as the Syrian government even though it’s spent the past five years utterly destroying the country.

It took six months for Bush to assemble an ad-hoc coalition in order to invade Iraq after his anti-Saddam speech at the U.N. General Assembly. Putin waited only a couple days before launching his Russian-only war on terror in Syria. ISIL — Russia’s official target — was struck only marginally by an all-out offensive that hammered the Syrian opposition.

It took a year for the U.S. Iraqi invasion to provoke reprisals in Europe, when 191 people were killed in a terrorist attack in Madrid in March 2004. It only took a month and a half for the Orthodox Church-blessed Russian “crusade” in Syria to stoke a string of attacks that struck Paris, and later Tunis, Istanbul, San Bernardino and Jakarta.

Bush’s war in Iraq paved the way for the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda to morph into ISIL. But the jihadi insurgency couldn’t have done so without the active support of Bashar al-Assad’s intelligence community, long before the 2011 Syrian uprising. For years, the Syrian despot spared jihadi strongholds and focused his strikes on the rebel forces. ISIL fought these same forces with the same eagerness, skirting possible confrontations with Assad whenever possible. No wonder Putin praised “the Syrian government and its armed forces, who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face” in his U.N. speech. But “terrorism,” in this case, refers mainly to the opposition, not ISIL.

The Syrian “peace talks” that recently collapsed in Geneva provided Russia with a golden opportunity to escalate its global war on terror. Despite the intensity of its offensive over the past four months, Russia had been unable to tip the balance in favor of the Assad regime before Geneva. Iran had also dramatically increased its direct involvement, beefing up various militias mobilized from Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan.

But the tipping point was Washington’s inability to conceive of a plan B in the likely case Geneva talks foundered. Obsessed with Geneva, and powerless to change Russia’s stance, the Obama administration focused all its diplomatic efforts on the Syrian opposition.

The “New Middle East” Putin is fighting for is already more nightmarish than the one George W. Bush envisioned.

So the problem was not just that “the United States botched the Syrian talks before they even began,” as some rightfully claimed. The decision to downscale support to Syrian opposition on the ground, in a move to force them to attend peace talks that gave no guarantee of a post-Assad political transition, did far more damage. Washington even strong-armed Turkey and Saudi Arabia into halting the delivery of the anti-tank weaponry that had helped the Syrian guerrillas hold fast during the previous Russian-Iranian onslaughts. This was a game-changer — and the Assad camp started to move on all fronts.

Massive Russian bombings have become even more indiscriminate, with the worst violence unleashed on Aleppo — Syria’s second-largest city — which was partly “liberated” by the opposition in 2012. The Russian-led forces are now bound to cut from Turkey the part of Aleppo that revolutionary forces had liberated from ISIL two years ago. This Russian onslaught has already prompted tens of thousands of Syrian civilians to flee their homes. Thousands are trapped on the Syrian side of the sealed Turkish border; yet another wave of refugees fleeing earth Russia has scorched. Meanwhile, ISIL is watching the disaster unfold, and waiting.

Syrian men walk amidst the rubble and debris in the Qadi Askar district of the northern Syrian city of Aleppo | Zein Al-Rifa/AFP/Getty

The “New Middle East” Putin is fighting for is already more nightmarish than the one George W. Bush envisioned. And what does the Obama administration stand to gain by abandoning the Syrian population to Russian carpet-bombing, and by welcoming the Kremlin’s ideas on how to end the conflict? At least the French U.N. representative had the decency to state that “negotiations cannot be a smoke screen allowing the [Assad] regime to continue quietly its massacres.” The ongoing Russian offensive can only bring more terror, and displace more innocent Syrians.

A full-fledged “global war on terror,” Putin-style, is on its way: It is not only about Syria, or even the Middle East, now, but about the world we are prepared to live in. The “ceasefire” announced in Munich could prove to be as murderously deceptive as the “peace talks” in Geneva. What is developing in Aleppo will affect not only the region, but Europe as a whole. And certainly for the worst.

Jean-Pierre Filiu is professor of Middle East studies at Sciences Po, Paris School of International Affairs (PSIA). He recently published “From Deep State to Islamic State” at Oxford University Press (New York) and Hurst (London).

Related stories on these topics:

Tim Bond

To always blame Russia for the total collapse of order in the Middle East may provide some brief comfort for some folk; however the truth is the West has never really comprehended the conflicting tribal instincts of this oil rich region (kingdom). How many Afghan wars lost and forgotten?

1922 when Britain and France fixed the borders under SYKES-PICOT “deal” now look suspect and out of date with the rise of ISIS; a deadly mix of fanatical extremists out for revenge.

Russia openly supports Assad but Russia open to any suggestions to bring peace because millions of Syrians have departed for Turkey Jordan and Europe in desperation. John Kerry and FM Lavrov seem to be on the same page looking for shared solutions. This is no time to revisit Cold War antics.

Sooner or later some sanity will prevail because Europe is no mood for more war after failed states in Afghanistan Libya Iraq Yemen and what remains standing in Syria. We are running out of time; or is the human race determined to fight to the end of time?

Posted on 2/12/16 | 4:33 PM CEST

Simon

Is this week on Politico called “lets blame Putin for all evils in the world”?

Posted on 2/13/16 | 2:06 AM CEST

flemming

On the other hand one may ask oneself, if at all Assad was in control of his country. I was severely puzzled by the fact that the Nordic embassies went up in flames so quickly in this country during the Mohammed crisis. As Trump said: the war in Iraq was a huge mistake and he probably knows more than someone else, that Iraq might have been the wrong target during the 00ies, where the most of the assailants for the 9/11 attack were undeniably Saudis and their proxies. And what was this with Afghanistan, when the USA was in the country and Saudi blood money sponsored the Taliban to kill US soldiers, who still have a formidable presence in Qatar. Yes smiling and your and stabbing a back into your back at the same time.

Posted on 2/14/16 | 6:59 PM CEST

flemming

On the other hand one may ask oneself, if at all Assad was in control of his country. I was severely puzzled by the fact that the Nordic embassies went up in flames so quickly in this country during the Mohammed crisis. As Trump said: the war in Iraq was a huge mistake and he probably knows more than someone else, that Iraq might have been the wrong target during the 00ies, where the most of the assailants for the 9/11 attack were undeniably Saudis and their proxies. And what was this with Afghanistan, when the USA was in the country and Saudi blood money sponsored the Taliban to kill US soldiers, who still have a formidable presence in Qatar. Yes smiling into your face and stabbing a back into your back at the same time.

Posted on 2/14/16 | 7:02 PM CEST

flemming

On the other hand one may ask oneself, if at all Assad was in control of his country. I was severely puzzled by the fact that the Nordic embassies went up in flames so quickly in this country during the Mohammed crisis. As Trump said: the war in Iraq was a huge mistake and he probably knows more than someone else, that Iraq might have been the wrong target during the 00ies, where the most of the assailants for the 9/11 attack were undeniably Saudis and their proxies. And what was this with Afghanistan, when the USA was in the country and Saudi blood money sponsored the Taliban to kill US soldiers, who still have a formidable presence in Qatar. Yes smiling into your face and stabbing a knife into your back at the same time.

What is very clear is that Putin’s plans will not address any of the core reasons behind IS recruitment and success.

Posted on 2/14/16 | 9:41 PM CEST

jax

The Russians had impressive results in 6 months time, while we constantly have failed for 15 years. This article was the effort of one our most educated experts, or at least a professors in international politics.
Reading it, I don’t doubt for a second that it is wiser for Europe to follow the Russian lead on this one.